New proposal on waterway usage unclear about ‘threats’

By MATTHEW BEATON / The News Herald

Published: Thursday, December 19, 2013 at 10:26 PM.

The base owns a portion of Shell Island, which would be affected if the restricted area were put in place. The group Friends of Shell Island has met with base officials but remains unhappy with the current proposal.

The base has about 29,000 acres of property, which is plenty to work with to create an on-land buffer, said Stephanie Somerset, the group’s executive director. The base only has buildings on the water at a few locations; there it could use a waterway buffer zone, but everywhere else the buffer should be done with a fence on land, she said.

There also is plenty of technology, such as cameras, that could accompany fencing and would be more effective than a “couple of guys in a boat with some binoculars,” Somerset said.

“They haven’t convinced me of the practicality of using policemen in boats to look for security threats when they have 129 miles of shoreline and only a handful of boats,” she said.

The base has said Somerset’s suggestions are not financially feasible.

TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE — Though adjustments have been made, Tyndall Air Force Base officials were still vague Thursday on details about when — and for how long — access within 500 feet of its property would be shut down to boaters during times off heightened security under a new proposal.

A public outcry followed the release of the initial proposal in May, and many residents and activists still aren’t satisfied with an updated version. More than 100 attended a public hearing Thursday night at Gulf Coast State College, and plenty voiced their concerns.

The base has water on three sides of its 129 miles of coastline, which includes part of Shell Island. If the proposal is enacted, Tyndall, with little advance, could restrict access up to 500 feet from its shoreline for an indefinite amount of time. Officials would not provide details on what would constitute such a threat or how long it would stay in place.

“It would be any threat that would jeopardize the mission of Tyndall Air Force Base,” Maj. Anthony McCarty, 325th Security Forces Squadron commander, said in an interview, noting it’s “very unlikely” to happen.

McCarty said a shutdown would be on “limited duration,” just to mitigate the threat, but he did not provide any specifics on hours or days the buffer zone would be in place.

Locals who rely on open waterways for their livelihood are concerned about the possible impact, as are recreational boaters and fishing enthusiasts. There are only about 100 days during the summer to make money on the water, said Jim Purcell, who sells ice cream off his boat.

“If they even shut down a couple of them (days), it will have a big impact on our income,” he said, adding it would be a “big chunk” of revenue lost.

The base owns a portion of Shell Island, which would be affected if the restricted area were put in place. The group Friends of Shell Island has met with base officials but remains unhappy with the current proposal.

The base has about 29,000 acres of property, which is plenty to work with to create an on-land buffer, said Stephanie Somerset, the group’s executive director. The base only has buildings on the water at a few locations; there it could use a waterway buffer zone, but everywhere else the buffer should be done with a fence on land, she said.

There also is plenty of technology, such as cameras, that could accompany fencing and would be more effective than a “couple of guys in a boat with some binoculars,” Somerset said.

“They haven’t convinced me of the practicality of using policemen in boats to look for security threats when they have 129 miles of shoreline and only a handful of boats,” she said.

The base has said Somerset’s suggestions are not financially feasible.

Unsure about the future

Somerset has confidence in the current officials’ assurances to use the restricted area only in rare circumstances and open it as soon as possible, but she’s unsure about future officials.

“Theoretically a future administration could close something down permanently,” she said.

Another concern is that Tyndall would engage in active surveillance on locals in the water, if it already believes activity within 500 feet could pose a risk during times of heightened security.

“We question that entire strategy, frankly,” Somerset said.

Her group also pushed for a five-year sunset provision where the rule would need to be re-enacted, after possibly being modified, but base officials didn’t want to do that.

During the public hearing’s question period, McCarty was asked about a sunset provision. He told the crowd the proposal is a long time coming, has been in the process since after the 9/11 attacks, and he didn’t think it was necessary.

“We don’t anticipate needing a sunset clause in any capacity,” he said.

Somerset also said she wasn’t given any specifics on what constitutes a threat. During the hearing, McCarty said a threat could be local or national, such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but it would be more than just a general threat.

The base has no law enforcement authority in the water now, but, if approved, the new measure would allow it to demand boaters leave the restricted area and board boats that do not and ask for IDs.

Boat patrols

A provision in an earlier version allowed Tyndall to board vessels and ask for IDs when the restricted area was not in place, but that was removed and is not in the latest version.

The draft proposal also states that at all times, even when the restricted area is not in place, “boat patrols may make contact with persons or vessels within 500 feet of Tyndall’s shoreline to evaluate” the possible threat posed.

During the hearing, residents also wanted to know how valuable a 500-foot buffer zone would be during times of heightened security. McCarty said it would provide a “reactionary time.”

McCarty said the patrolling and maintaining of the restricted area would be done using the base’s current budget. He also said the proposal would allow a process for those who would need to enter the restricted area to do so. It would, however, require written permission from the base commander or his/her authorized representative. For that reason, McCarty said he didn’t foresee any adverse economic impact to the community.

Tyndall officials have said more public hearings are to come, but no dates have been given. There are several steps in the process to get the provision approved and it can be amended based on public comment. The goal is to have it enacted by the end of 2014, McCarty said.

Some in the crowd felt the public comments would have little impact on how the finalized version of the proposal. One written comment said it seems like it’s “already a done deal.”